At present, several rounds of indirect talks between the U.S. and Iran have taken place in Oman and Italy, with more meetings planned.

These long-standing adversaries have met at the highest level for the first time in years to discuss a new agreement that would halt Iran’s development of nuclear weapons—a goal Tehran denies pursuing—in exchange for sanctions relief.

But what would constitute a good deal for Iran, the U.S., Israel, and the unstable countries of the region? Capping uranium enrichment at 4% purity—something Iran might agree to while retaining the ability to ramp up production if needed—would be an ideal solution. Preserving its modernized centrifuge systems and possibly accepting a monitoring and inspection regime in return would be a victory, regardless of what happens with its advanced ballistic missile program. Of course, all sanctions would also have to be lifted.

From Iran’s perspective, the worst-case scenario that would satisfy Israel would be an agreement requiring Iran to abandon its entire nuclear infrastructure and its 60%-enriched uranium. This would resemble the 2003 deal in which Libya surrendered its nuclear, chemical, biological, and ballistic missile programs in exchange for full rehabilitation. But everyone, especially in Iran, remembers all too well how that turned out. The West can only offer hollow promises—not keep them—and the world has long since learned this lesson.

Iran’s Clear Stance on the Deal 

Tehran’s official position boils down to two key demands. First, Iran insists on the lifting of sanctions that have severely damaged its economy, particularly in the oil and banking sectors. Second, Iranian authorities demand recognition of their........

© New Eastern Outlook